Isn’t it also a problem if there is too little catalyst loss in the catalytic device?
Thread Content
As the title suggests, the wear and loss is too low, and the frequency of catalyst removal is high – could this reduce the efficiency of the catalyst in the bed?
This post was last edited by Refiner on 2018-6-13 07:54, stating that cyclone separators have high efficiency and stable operation. If the activity level is high, less freshening agent is needed; if the quality of the balancing agent is good, ordering it from outside is an option
Less operation means the system is working properly, indicates that the centrifuge is efficient, and shows that our operational skills are high: lol. More operation makes subsequent flue gas treatment more complicated, but it’s still better than having to discharge the agent frequently
Less running agent is a good thing. Running agents can be analyzed from two aspects: 1) Reaction running agents increase the amount of slurry that is discharged, reducing the yield of the product. The slurry system has a high solid content, making it prone to coking and blockages. 2. Regenerated running agents affect the operating conditions of the flue gas turbine and the heat extraction efficiency of the boiler. It affects various issues such as dust treatment in flue gas emissions. If there is concern that a high frequency of catalyst removal will reduce the efficiency of the catalyst in the bed, an analysis to balance catalyst activity and particle size can be conducted, and the amount of fresh catalyst added can be adjusted accordingly to minimize catalyst removal.
It’s not that the amount of running is low; certainly, a low amount of running is a good thing. But it’s the fact that the amount of running is too low. Have you all encountered such a situation before? A low amount of running also poses problems, as it leads to an increase in the consumption of catalysts.
If you run less and add less, how can the unit consumption be high?
If less running is done, more unloading is required. When running, only fine powder is used; can unloading be done selectively to remove only the fine powder?
I wonder if anyone has encountered this situation; are there any good solutions?
If you experience less loss, and can reduce the dosage while maintaining the catalyst’s activity, how could the tonnage consumption be high?
I’m not sure what this internet friend is trying to convey; the more I listen, the more confused I get. What about you guys?
Don’t worry about whether running less is good or bad. It’s good that there’s no leakage; this indicates that your equipment is in good condition and can continue to operate for a long time ； The release agent also prevents it from running away.